Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42469156›Full record

ReviewActa anaesthesiologica Scandinavica2026

Catheter-Based Therapies for Intermediate-High Risk Pulmonary Embolism: A Protocol for a Systematic Review With Bayesian Pairwise and Network Meta-Analyses.

Jacob Hindborg Hovmann, Thomas Skjoldborg Sornn-Friese, Frederik Færgemann Lau, Niels Brandt, Isak Mazanti Cold, Janus C Jakobsen, Jasmin Dam Lukoschewitz, Alasdair D Henderson, Anne Sophie Overgaard Olesen, Jens Dahlgaard Hove and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Jacob Hindborg HovmannDepartment of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital-Amager-Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-6289-4371
Thomas Skjoldborg Sornn-FrieseDepartment of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital-Amager-Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-3642-4863
Frederik Færgemann LauDepartment of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6929-4495
Niels BrandtDepartment of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital-Amager-Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-7827-3358
Isak Mazanti ColdDepartment of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital-Amager-Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1841-6971
Janus C JakobsenCopenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Capital Region of Denmark, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Jasmin Dam LukoschewitzDepartment of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital-Amager-Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0923-3030
Alasdair D HendersonSchool of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Health, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8903-4906
Anne Sophie Overgaard OlesenSchool of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Health, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7783-7357
Jens Dahlgaard HoveDepartment of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital-Amager-Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5600-5623
Jesper KjærgaardDepartment of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5244-0399
Johannes GrandDepartment of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital-Amager-Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5511-4668

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntermediate-high risk pulmonary embolism (PE) represents a clinically challenging subgroup of acute PE, characterized by right ventricular dysfunction and increased risk of hemodynamic deterioration despite treatment with anticoagulation therapy. Although systemic thrombolysis may provide more rapid reperfusion, its use is limited by an increased risk of major bleeding. Catheter-based treatment strategies have emerged as potential alternatives, but their comparative efficacy and safety remain uncertain.

objectiveTo assess the benefits and harms of catheter-based treatment strategies compared with contemporary control regimens, including standard anticoagulation with or without systemic thrombolysis, in patients with intermediate-high risk PE.

methodsThis protocol outlines a systematic review with Bayesian pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials evaluating catheter-based therapies for hospitalized patients with intermediate-high risk PE. Eligible interventions include catheter-directed thrombolysis, ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis, and catheter-based embolectomy. Comparators may include standard anticoagulation alone or in combination with systemic thrombolysis or other active control regimens reflecting standard of care. Searches will be conducted in relevant databases, supplemented by trial registries. Two reviewers will independently screen studies, extract data, and assess risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Bayesian pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analysis will be performed using weakly informative priors to synthesize direct and indirect evidence across interventions. Results will be reported as posterior effect estimates with 95% credible intervals. The primary outcome will be all-cause mortality. Secondary and exploratory outcomes include major bleeding as defined according to the criteria of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis within 7 days, hospital length of stay, and change in RV/LV ratio within 48 h. GRADE assessments will be performed where applicable. DISCUSSION: This review will synthesize direct and indirect randomized evidence on catheter-based treatment strategies for intermediate-high risk PE. The findings may help clarify the role of these interventions in contemporary management, inform future guideline recommendations, and identify persistent evidence gaps requiring further large-scale randomized trials.

Indexed as

CatheterizationPulmonary EmbolismThrombolytic TherapyAnticoagulantsBayes TheoremEmbolectomyHumansNetwork Meta-Analysis as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSystematic Reviews as TopicAnticoagulantsBayesian pairwise meta‐analysescatheter‐directed therapyintermediate‐high risknetwork meta‐analysispulmonary embolismsystematic reviewthrombectomythrombolysis

Identifiers

PMID42469156
PMCPMC13379321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.